This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Loved automobiles with 4 wheels? Chinese cars have 13! In your face suckers!
If it's not usb-c it's banned in EU. Because we stopped there and we won't go forward.
the GPMI cable comes in two flavors — a Type-B that seems to have a proprietary connector and a Type-C that is compatible with the USB-C standard
I actually copied this from the article to come here to the comments and have a whinge about all the different USB-C standards, and here you are explaining the reason why.
Don't get so excited. Read my comment again.
Actually? I don't know much about that legislation. Does it really not have room built-in for tech improvements?
It does! If there's a good alternative it can be proposed, or that's what I read here on Lemmy
Why not use the already open displayPort and make it better.
noo we need yet another standard!
Lock-in.
Is it an open standard?
To quote the article:
a Type-B that seems to have a proprietary connector and a Type-C that is compatible with the USB-C standard.
So its half proprietary. No thanks!
Most important question
Imagine putting out a new high bandwidth cable standard in 2025 based on copper.
The sooner display and networking move to SFP, the better.
Today I learned DidplayPort 2.1 can carry 240W.
That's a lot of power! Are there even any devices that use this?
PCs can use >1KW.
I don't know why you'd power a PC over DisplayPort though. New 8k monitors do go up to 190W, so we could exceed 240W if we try hard enough.
So if you have a beefy psu you should be able to power your monitor off tbe DP?
Or does carrying power limit data throughput?
The way it works for power over Ethernet — and I assume USB power delivery must work the same way — is that it does not reduce bandwidth because they run the power and the signal over the same wires at the same time.
There is a a power injector at one end and a filter at the other end that separate out the high-frequency signal and the DC (no-frequency) power into different wires.
This is essentially the same thing as they’re already doing for multi-frequency stacking on those same wires (and on fiber) to get the crazy bandwidth in the first place. DC power is just one more low (very very low) frequency running on the same stack.
It might? I think USB uses data lanes for power delivery above some point, and I wouldn't be surprised if DP does the same.
Hi! I actually work at a major electrical connector company, so maybe I can shed some light on this.
I have no idea.
I used to work with electrical engineers, and whenever I asked about details, they'd shrug and say, "black magic?" Checks out.
Based on this pin configuration, there's only two dedicated power pins, which isn't very good for large wattages. The rest are twinax signal pairs separated by ground to reduce crosstalk.
Usually when connectors are designed for power delivery, they'll use bigger contacts to reduce the contact resistance (signal contacts tend to be small so you can fit more of them in the same space). I'm guessing the original DP connector form factor wasn't made with such high power in mind, so it would make a lot of sense to use the spare signal pins for power delivery in this case. Running too much power through too few small pins can damage the contacts, by either by instant-welding the contact surfaces or by overheating the connector (see NVIDIA GPUs) ((also high voltages can cause arcing, which even in the best case will seriously degrade any connector)).
Take all of this with a huge grain of salt cause I just learned this stuff like a month ago, and my department has nothing to do with any of it. Just though someone might find it interesting.
Running that much power next to a data line sounds like a terrible idea for signal integrity, especially if something shorts to said data lines. It just sounds sketchy or filled with so many asterisks that it's functional impossible to reach their claimed throughput.
See, IDK anything about data and power and cables but I dislike the vibe when I dock my laptop with that itty bitty USB-C connector that does power and 2x monitors and networking and peripherals.
I did buy the bonkers expensive proper cable from lenovo, and it does generally just work, but maybe once every few weeks I have to unplug & re-plug.
More power and more data through the same cable just seems daft.
It's likely dc current which without the alternating magnetic fields will not degrade the signal as bad. But I whole heartedly agree with you on power delivery. What could possibly need/use that much power‽
Yeah, considering the recent VGA power connectors problems, what could possibly go wrong?
wHy Is mY tV sMoKiNg?!?42??
The option to run one cable to the monitor, or reversely charge your laptop with one docking cable.
Maybe you could use this to daisy chain monitors and power them all.
The option to run one cable to the monitor, or reversely charge your laptop with one docking cable.
USB-C docks can already do this. Obviously with less power and it's not perfect by any means, but we don't need another technology for this. And sure, it's two cables, one from wall outlet to integrated dock/monitor and usb-c from dock to laptop, but no matter the technology you still need something to plug in to wall outlet.
USB standard is up to what, 40Gbps and 240W? That's pushing the envelope already. We'll see if this new standard can prove itself, anyways.
USB4v2 can do 80Gbps and 240W.
It can also do 120Gbps/40Gbps asymmetric.
This must be for commercial displays where it is beneficial for installation to have power and data over a single cable.
I can't think why I would want power delivery to my PC monitor over the display cable. It would just put extra thermal load on the GPU.
I think it's aimed at TVs in general, not computer monitors. Many people mount their TVs to the wall, and having a single cable to run hidden in the wall would be awesome.
I wonder what the use case is for 480W though. Gigantic 80" screens generally draw something like 120W. If you're going bigger than that, I would think the mounting/installation would require enough hardware and labor that running out a normal outlet/receptacle would be trivial.
Gigantic 80" screens generally draw something like 120W
In HDR mode they can draw a lot more than that for short peaks
My 50" 1080p LCD draws over 200w...
Headroom and safety factor. Current screens may draw 120w, but future screens may draw more, and it is much better to be drawing well under the max rated power.
It would just put extra thermal load on the GPU.
Passing power through doesn't have to put noticeable load on the GPU. The main problem I see there is getting even more power to the GPU - Nvidia's top cards are already at the melting point for their power connector.
Passing power through doesn’t have to put noticeable load on the GPU.
I specifically said thermal load. Power delivery always causes heat dissipation due to I^2^R losses.
That's what I meant. Compared to the power the GPU is actually using, transmission losses for a pass-through should be negligible. If you have a good way to get it to the card in the first place.
Even an 80” tv only uses around 150W, if my research is correct. Surely this must be thinking about massive displays.
If you’re gonna release a new standard, may as well have the headroom for future growth so it’s not outdated too soon in the future.
